Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35037022›Full record

ArticleBriefings in bioinformatics2022

RiboReport - benchmarking tools for ribosome profiling-based identification of open reading frames in bacteria.

Rick Gelhausen, Teresa Müller, Sarah L Svensson, Omer S Alkhnbashi, Cynthia M Sharma, Florian Eggenhofer, Rolf Backofen

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Briefings in bioinformatics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 15% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed, 29 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. The Cryptic Bacterial Microproteome.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2024
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Small proteins in Gram-positive bacteria.FEMS microbiology reviews · 2023
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Rick GelhausenBioinformatics Group, Department of Computer Science, University of Freiburg, Georges-Köhler-Allee 106, 79110, Freiburg, Germany.
Teresa MüllerBioinformatics Group, Department of Computer Science, University of Freiburg, Georges-Köhler-Allee 106, 79110, Freiburg, Germany.
Sarah L SvenssonDepartment of Molecular Infection Biology II, Institute of Molecular Infection Biology (IMIB), University of Würzburg, Josef-Schneider-Str. 2 / D15, 97080, Würzburg, Germany.
Omer S AlkhnbashiInformation and Computer Science Department, King Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals, Saudi Arabia.
Cynthia M SharmaDepartment of Molecular Infection Biology II, Institute of Molecular Infection Biology (IMIB), University of Würzburg, Josef-Schneider-Str. 2 / D15, 97080, Würzburg, Germany.
Florian EggenhoferBioinformatics Group, Department of Computer Science, University of Freiburg, Georges-Köhler-Allee 106, 79110, Freiburg, Germany.
Rolf BackofenBioinformatics Group, Department of Computer Science, University of Freiburg, Georges-Köhler-Allee 106, 79110, Freiburg, Germany.
University of Freiburg · DEUniversity of Würzburg · DEKing Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals · SA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Small proteins encoded by short open reading frames (ORFs) with 50 codons or fewer are emerging as an important class of cellular macromolecules in diverse organisms. However, they often evade detection by proteomics or in silico methods. Ribosome profiling (Ribo-seq) has revealed widespread translation in genomic regions previously thought to be non-coding, driving the development of ORF detection tools using Ribo-seq data. However, only a handful of tools have been designed for bacteria, and these have not yet been systematically compared. Here, we aimed to identify tools that use Ribo-seq data to correctly determine the translational status of annotated bacterial ORFs and also discover novel translated regions with high sensitivity. To this end, we generated a large set of annotated ORFs from four diverse bacterial organisms, manually labeled for their translation status based on Ribo-seq data, which are available for future benchmarking studies. This set was used to investigate the predictive performance of seven Ribo-seq-based ORF detection tools (REPARATION_blast, DeepRibo, Ribo-TISH, PRICE, smORFer, ribotricer and SPECtre), as well as IRSOM, which uses coding potential and RNA-seq coverage only. DeepRibo and REPARATION_blast robustly predicted translated ORFs, including sORFs, with no significant difference for ORFs in close proximity to other genes versus stand-alone genes. However, no tool predicted a set of novel, experimentally verified sORFs with high sensitivity. Start codon predictions with smORFer show the value of initiation site profiling data to further improve the sensitivity of ORF prediction tools in bacteria. Overall, we find that bacterial tools perform well for sORF detection, although there is potential for improving their performance, applicability, usability and reproducibility.

Indexed as

RibosomesBacteriaOpen Reading FramesReproducibility of ResultsbacteriabenchmarkRibo-seqribosome profilingsmall proteins

Identifiers

PMID35037022
PMCPMC8921622
OpenAlexW4206276702

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.